Oblivious Question Episode: 1

"Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion" (spydermonkeywrench)
12/25/2014 at 21:45 • Filed to: Question

ok, I feel like the answer is directly in front of me, and I'm just to stupid to realize it, but why Isn't the Porsche layout system more popular?

By that I mean the horizontally opposed engine in RR setup. And I'm not talking from a performance view, but an average daily commute car. Including SUVs and Crossovers.

Basically FF vs. RR

I can't see many disadvantages:

•Better traction in snow, which depends on were you live, but this isn't exactly a bad thing to have

•Better weight transfer on braking

•A sporty capability (for the enthusiast in us all)

•Low center of gravity

•low engine so they're can be a trunk (with intakes on the side behind the doors) (basically a wagon/SUV/crossover configuration depending what you need)

•Way more fastback/wagon/hatch designs (which is a good thing, depending on your opinion)

•Frunk

•being able to say frunk all the time

•Better gas mileage (sorta like FWD? Idk, I'm pulling this one out of my ass)

•no middle hump- like a FWD car

•All compact in the back- like a FWD car

Now disadvantages I can sorta see:

•Not enough legroom for rear passengers (but since not every car has to be a 911, just move the A pillar forward, raise the hood line, and bam, suitable rear seats, without terrifyingly horrible looks, not to mention the engine can be a tiny turbo 2.0L H4 making 150HP)

•Chance to snap oversteer in corners, especially when lifting off (I'm just going to believe everything I hear about how great the VW golfs differential is in being able to be fun even though it's FWD, so with differential tuning, this shouldn't be an issue, not to mention TC)

•Possible air intake issues (biggest issue I could find, but... Roof scoop? Make the entire bottom of a car flat with air intakes in the bottom? And this pesky issue could result in the loss of truck/frunk space for air channels, which would negate a benefactor)

•Maintenance issues (Ok, But most people don't do any serious maintenance other than oil changes, and even that's a little ehh...)

•no place to throw a hybrid system because of the low Horizontal Engine(also a big issue- but if anything, ANYTHING, if it's absolutely necessary, a bit of the frunk can be sacrificed to have a hybrid system in the front, and because RR cars cause better all round braking, regen brakes can be put on... Which means $$$ but still)

•Wide engine (Turbo watercooled H4, with a large bore, and tiny stroke solves this. I think. I have no idea what advantage Bore has over stroke when increasing/decreasing, soooo... That's probably gonna be my next google search/article depending if I can find anything)

•No place for rear tire (1. AAA 2. Throw it above the engine)

So Oppo, what's the dangling drawback that is oblivious to me?

DISCUSSION (29)

Brian Silvestro > Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion
12/25/2014 at 21:48

I honestly don't know why more companies don't do it on at least some models. Both the Twingo and the i3 seem to apply the idea nicely, and there's plenty of room in the back.

aberson Bresident of the FullyAssed Committe > Brian Silvestro
12/25/2014 at 22:03

Its cost mainly

no company wants to spend money R&Ding a new design when the old one does what it supposed to perfectly already (in their minds anyway)

Tekamul > Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion
12/25/2014 at 22:07

The short answer is many of your assumptions about the positives are flawed.

A RR setup is bad in the snow for anything but a straight line, bad for brake stability in panic stops, and makes even dealer services longer and more expensive.

nFamousCJ - Keeper of Stringbean, Gengars and a Deezul > Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion
12/25/2014 at 22:14

I see the general consumer being the problem. The RR layout is synonymous with sports car- EG the 911. When said general consumer is searching for their next economy grocery getter and work transporter they'll immediately discredit the RR equipt superior economy mobile because it's similar to those scary sports cars and they want affordability and practicality ... Even though said RR model is cheaper and more practical.

Drakkon- Most Glorious and Upright Person of Genius > Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion
12/25/2014 at 22:18

I think the next Audi TT needs to swap the entire vehicle end for end. Engine all the way in the back. AWD driving to the front with no engine weight on the steering axle. The traction would be favorable, the steering would be light and natural.

What's not to love?

HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles > Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion
12/25/2014 at 22:19

there was a rumor awhile ago that Mazda was making a single rotor sub compact car with essentially an RF setup. The engine in the back would be like a 600, or 550cc single rotor, and it would basically just be a range extending generator. to there would be a motor at the front axle and the wee lil rotory in the rear. but that was at least a year ago, and I haven't heard anything more on it.

HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles > nFamousCJ - Keeper of Stringbean, Gengars and a Deezul
12/25/2014 at 22:20

the Corvair could be blamed for it all really.

nFamousCJ - Keeper of Stringbean, Gengars and a Deezul > HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles
12/25/2014 at 22:22

Oh dear... The poor corvair. There needs to be a write-up of cars that managed to ruin great concepts that we don't get to enjoy today. Chapter 1: Corvair::RR Layout

Drakkon- Most Glorious and Upright Person of Genius > Tekamul
12/25/2014 at 22:22

-Actually, braking yields better traction per wheel than even a mid-engine. Way better than FF

That Bastard Kurtis - An Attempt to Standardize My Username Across Platforms > HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles
12/25/2014 at 22:26

The RR layout of the Corvair wasn't actually the problem, it was the swing arm suspension of the early cars. The later cars got an independent rear suspension that fixed the tuck under problems of the early cars. Amplifying that was the tendency of owners and mechanics to equalize the air pressure in the tires front to rear....factory recommended lower pressures in the front, but people weren't used to that.

So as usual, the cars weren't the problem, it was the people.

Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion > Tekamul
12/25/2014 at 22:27

Well from a plebeian, non-enthusiast level, everything here can be fixed.

If the first one is true, how come all those ice drift expletives I always see in magazines ALWAYS has a fleet of Porsches?

And the second one can easily be solved with ABS/brake mapping (is that a thing? That needs to be a thing) and why would the dealer services be longer?

If it's because RR drivetrains are *currently* more rare, I'm talking in the sense that these would be much easier to service as much more cars would have the drivetrain

Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion > Drakkon- Most Glorious and Upright Person of Genius
12/25/2014 at 22:30

um... They do have that... it's called a Porsche

Drakkon- Most Glorious and Upright Person of Genius > Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion
12/25/2014 at 22:34

No, that's not what I mean. Transverse turbo 4-cyl. Transaxle mostly under the floor pan. At least a foot shorter.

dogisbadob > Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion
12/25/2014 at 22:36

The smart car and i-Miev are RR :)

No really though, this is the reason that RR cars aren't more popular

Kinja'd!!!

Oh also, Porsche kept it around too long. They should've stopped making them after 1973 or 1998. Now they're just jealous and actually have to cripple the superior Boxster-Cayman to not be as good as the 911.

Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion > Drakkon- Most Glorious and Upright Person of Genius
12/25/2014 at 22:41

im getting there

I have 911, Turbo I4, which I'm going to assume is transverse, but no AWD... And it's a diesel...

Drakkon- Most Glorious and Upright Person of Genius > Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion
12/25/2014 at 22:44

No, that's a longitudinal I-4. Not transverse. Why a Jetta TDi? All 90 snorting HP of it?

Besides, an LS fits and weighs about the same.

Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion > Drakkon- Most Glorious and Upright Person of Genius
12/25/2014 at 22:50

wtf does LS have to do with anything?

We're talking about a AWD I4 Porsche.

Drakkon- Most Glorious and Upright Person of Genius > Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion
12/25/2014 at 23:03

no, my point I'd why a TDi 911?

Do what you're going to do. V10 Toureg TDI fu- show! Jetta TDI?

And the trend for weeks on the site has been to LS all the things that cannot be turbo'd. And maybe turbo some of the things that have already been LS'd

Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion > Drakkon- Most Glorious and Upright Person of Genius
12/25/2014 at 23:09

Twin turbo LS3 Miata is apparently a thing, but back to the original statement: It was a joke

Tekamul > Drakkon- Most Glorious and Upright Person of Genius
12/26/2014 at 08:46

In normal, and skilled braking that's true, which is great for enthusiasts. But not in panic stops, which are frequently (and most dangerous when) abrupt and at angles. And that's where lawyers, bean counters and the NHTSA live.

BloodlessWeevil > Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion
12/26/2014 at 15:34

The answer is: there really are no advantages that many people are willing to pay the premium for. It's an interesting question though, and I'm going to go through your points one by one (some of them are actually good, just not something useful to non-enthusiasts):

1. Better traction in snow. Not really. Having the engine in the rear allows the designers to achieve a 50/50 weight distribution easier. But, it gives us no traction advantage over any other 50/50, rear wheel drive vehicle (with all the disadvantages that come with it.)

2. Better weight transfer on braking. Again, any vehicle with an even weight distribution will have better lateral weight transfer than an unbalanced vehicle. Automakers take weight distribution into account when they design vehicles, and I think you would be surprised how how close most come to that 50/50 ratio (regardless of drive train layout.)

3. A sporty capability (for the enthusiast in us all.) I'm in favor of this. I'm not convinced a rear engine layout would make sense for most cars, but I often wish my car was rear wheel drive.

4. Low center of gravity. This comes courtesy of Porches being low-slung sports cars. Believe it or not, engine blocks are typically located as low as possible (and for exactly this reason.)

5. low engine so they're can be a trunk (with intakes on the side behind the doors) (basically a wagon/SUV/crossover configuration depending what you need)

+ 6. Way more fastback/wagon/hatch designs (which is a good thing, depending on your opinion) + 7. Frunk + 8. being able to say frunk all the time. Nothing wrong here, I just think one large trunk in the rear is more useful than two small ones on opposite ends. Personal preference I guess.

9. Better gas mileage (sorta like FWD? Idk, I'm pulling this one out of my ass) I have no idea why you think that. I can think of nothing regarding a rear engine layout that might improve mileage.

10. no middle hump- like a FWD car Take a look at some FWD cars, most have that central tunnel. This is a popular way to add rigidity and strength to the chassis with the added bonus of providing a convenient path between the front and rear. Fuel needs to get to the engine and there are typically a few bundles of wire running through there (in theory, you could design the car to eliminate/reroute all of that.)

11. All compact in the back- like a FWD car Yep, except that you will have to find a place for all the stuff that is normally back there (fuel and chassis structure being the major ones, modern uni-body chassis's have a large amount of metal there to reinforce the rest of the chassis and body.)

I'm still working on an introduction post, so you guys still have no idea who I am. Sorry, I'll get it up here eventually :)

Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion > BloodlessWeevil
12/26/2014 at 15:44

my question is why/what's the premium. What makes this system cost more?

NJAnon > Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion
12/26/2014 at 20:08

That's a pricey setup thats why its not done en masse. manufacturing the engine to "fit" there isn't easy. Then there's safety to consider.

I agree on the weight transfer when accelerating. Braking in a Porsche is another story.

BloodlessWeevil > Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion
12/27/2014 at 11:18

The premium comes from the extra design work needed to overcome the disadvantages. I cannot say what reasons pushed the industry away from that route "way back when," but right now there is an inertia cost associated with developing an entirely new platform. "Solutions" to common problems cannot be borrowed from similar setups in your lineup. So it will be more expensive to design (or you end up with an inferior design.) I cannot say if it will be more expensive to manufacture as I do not work in manufacturing.

Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion > BloodlessWeevil
12/28/2014 at 18:55

Good thing I want to become a car designer... Maybe I can change that.

(I sound so young/immature when I talk like this)

Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion > NJAnon
12/28/2014 at 18:57

but if it was produced en masse?

NJAnon > Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion
12/28/2014 at 20:50

Then we'd all pray that wages for our jobs would suddenly increase very high. :P

Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion > NJAnon
12/28/2014 at 20:52

Which we all do anyway...

BloodlessWeevil > Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion
12/29/2014 at 10:42

Hah, me too. I'm working in testing currently, but I think automotive design is in a bad place right now (the whole process and the end result.) Maybe it does sound immature, but there is no reason you couldn't. You need to work for a while first, find out what is broken and what can be done to improve on it. Then you need to convince people, and they will either use the better method or let you run with it until it becomes a problem for them. If it is a good idea it will never be a problem.